Pat Ryan SHREDS Pete Hegseth and Demands Resignation for Involving Politics Into the Military!

Have you ever worn a MAGA hat in front of the troops?

I own plenty of MAGA hats, but I don't wear a MAGA hat.

Have you ever worn one in front of the troops at an official event? I don't believe so. Do you think it's appropriate for the President of the United States to wear political merchandise, including a MAGA hat, at official events, including West Point commencement? The Commander-in-Chief can wear... I have to say this on the record.

I think your tenure as Secretary of Defense has been shameful and weak, and you should resign. We have all worn the uniform. We've all served in combat. We all love our country. We all revere our troops.

And I really want to speak with you both not as partisans, but as patriots. I want to talk specifically about the events at Fort Bragg the other day. General Kane, I want to start with you. As a junior officer, were you ever required to make a pledge of political loyalty? Yes or no? Sir, as you know, we're in a political military, so, you know, no.

Thank you. At any time in your 30-plus years of incredibly distinguished service, did you have to make a pledge of partisan or political loyalty?

No, sir.

Thank you. Did you ever serve in any unit or command at any level where service members were required to make a pledge of political loyalty?

No, sir. Thank you.

And I want to commend you. You've been on the record on this, including in your confirmation hearings, where you clarified, quote, I've never worn any political merchandise or said anything to that effect.

I appreciate that. That is the standard, and I commend you for saying so and continuing to model that. General Kane, one last question for you. Should soldiers have to pledge political loyalty to participate in an event with our commander in chief?

Yes or no, please.

Sir, I'm not, first, no. I don't, I'm not aware of any time in history that soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines have been asked to do that. I think, in all order. And I'm sorry, General, airmen, Marines have been asked to do that, I think.

And I'm sorry, General, I do want to, just in the interest of time, I want to talk about what happened at Fort Bragg two days ago. There was guidance put out, and this has been verified by multiple independent news outlets, saying, quote, these are to the soldiers

of the 18th Airborne Corps and U.S. Army, if soldiers have political views that are in opposition to the current administration, then they need to speak with their leadership and get swapped out. This is swapped out of the event with the president.

In addition, in an incredibly disturbing incident, there was a pop-up shop selling MAGA merchandise on post at Fort Bragg. And to summarize this, there was a commander from Bragg who said on the record, quote, this has been a bad week for the Army.

For anyone who cares about us being a neutral institution, this was shameful. If those are the facts, and I know the Army's investigating at least the MAGA pop-up shop, is that appropriate, General Kane?

Sir, I haven't seen any of these reports. I'm not familiar with them, but as I mentioned earlier and in my confirmation hearing, the nation demands a political nonpartisan military.

I appreciate you saying that and happy to share those reports. Secretary Hexeth, are you familiar with DOD Directive 1344.10, political activities of the members of the armed forces?

First off, I don't buy into your insinuation that pledges are being done under this administration.

I reclaim my time. Are you familiar with this DOD directive?

There's never one time in my service or in this Defense Department where politics has been considered for service members.

Are you familiar with this directive? Yes or no?

Which directive?

DOD Directive 1344.10. I'm happy to provide you a copy. There's even a one-page red and green cheat sheet. Are you familiar with it? We all, this is the same director from when we were all in uniform.

I'm sure I am.

Has anything changed in that directive under your guidance given what happened two days ago at Fort Bragg? Is there a new policy change that we're not aware of?

Again, I totally reject your insinuation.

Is there a policy change to DOD Directive 1344.10?

I know what you're attempting to insinuate,

but there's no policy change.

And there is no policy change.

Mr. Secretary, have you ever worn a MAGA hat in front of the troops? I own plenty of MAGA hats, but I don't have you ever worn one in front of the troops at a military at an official event. I Don't I don't believe I don't believe so Do you think it's appropriate for the president United States to wear political merchandise including a MAGA hat at? official events including West Point commencement The commander yes or no can wear whatever hat he wants to include the phrase make America great again

Because I would like so you think America great again because I would like to make America great again as well. So you think that's appropriate? The commander-in-chief has the right in front of his troops to wear whatever he'd like. Okay I strongly disagree with you and I urge you both especially you General Kane as we see an increasingly political rhetoric including from the secretary to please for the good of our troops this is an incredibly difficult moment and we need leaders like you to continue to echo the apolitical nature.

I have 12 seconds. Mr. Secretary, I don't say this lightly. I have to say this on the record. I think your tenure as Secretary of Defense has been shameful and weak and you should resign.

What we just heard from Pat Ryan wasn't mere theater. It was a critical moment for our democracy. Ryan didn't simply criticize Secretary Hegseth for a poor tone. He pinpointed a fundamental risk. When the military begins to resemble a political entity, it undermines the very foundations that maintain our nation's stability. Consider the stakes in practical terms. A unit's cohesion relies

on trust. Trust that orders are lawful, trust that leaders are not asking troops to take sides politically, and trust that all service members will be treated equally, regardless of their personal beliefs. When junior service members witness a commander expressing political bias or see partisan symbols on base, it creates an environment where conformity is pressured, making some feel unsafe about voicing concerns or fulfilling their duties without fear of political repercussions. This isn't an

abstract issue. It directly impacts readiness and can put lives at risk. Ryan emphasized the practical and constitutional boundaries here. Service members pledge allegiance to the Constitution, not to any individual or party. This is precisely why Department of Defense regulations, including the Lund's Rules Ryan mentioned, strictly limit political activities by service members and prohibit the military from

being used for partisan purposes. These regulations exist because history and common sense demonstrate the consequences of breaching the barrier between military service and party politics. The alarming aspect of the Fort Bragg reports is not just about a hat or a pop-up shop, it's about a troubling pattern. If leaders allow partisan messaging on base or subtly encourage soldiers to self-select out based on their political beliefs, the chain of command

shifts from merit and mission focus to one driven by politics and loyalty. This erosion of trust diminishes morale and fosters division within units that must function cohesively. Senior leaders must exemplify neutrality as their actions set the standard for countless service members who lack the option to simply opt out. Accountability is essential. Congress does not simply make noise. Oversight hearings, public records requests, inspector general investigations, and the broader political

process are vital tools for ensuring that the Department of Defense adheres to legal and traditional standards. If credible evidence surfaces indicating that policies or practices are varying into partisan enforcement, Such evidence must be thoroughly investigated, publicly disclosed, and rectified. Leaders who refuse to acknowledge mistakes or take action to restore neutrality

should be held accountable because the public relies on an apolitical military. Ultimately, this issue transcends any single official or hearing. It serves as a reminder that democratic norms are fragile and require active protection.

The oath to the Constitution is not merely symbolic, it represents an ongoing responsibility. Veterans like Pat Ryan lend particular credibility to this discussion because they understand the ramifications when that boundary becomes blurred. Their appeal is not about partisanship but rather about preserving institutional integrity. If you care about maintaining a capable and impartial military that safeguards everyone regardless of political affiliation, stay engaged.

Monitor these hearings, review oversight reports, and communicate with your representatives to demand strict enforcement of rules that keep service members out of Monitor these hearings, review oversight reports, and communicate with your representatives to demand strict enforcement of rules that keep service members out of partisan conflicts. A healthy democracy depends on citizens advocating for the institutions that uphold it.